Apple released an incremental update to its iTunes software Wednesday afternoon, nixing the Palm Pre's ability to sync with the application.

Last month, Apple warned Pre users that future software updates may kill sync capability with the device. Precentral.net confirmed the impact brought on by iTunes version 8.2.1.

When they unveiled the feature, handset maker Palm boasted about their smartphone's ability to transfer media from iTunes. The feature worked by identifying the smartphone in its hardware ID as an iPod -- a trick Apple warned might not work for long.

"Apple designs the hardware and software to provide seamless integration of the iPhone and iPod with iTunes, the iTunes Store, and tens of thousands of apps on the App Store," Apple warned a document released in June. "Apple is aware that some third-parties claim that their digital media players are able to sync with Apple software. However, Apple does not provide support for, or test for compatibility with, non-Apple digital media players."

When it released the update Wednesday, Apple was vague about what benefits version 8.2.1 offered users.

"iTunes 8.2.1 provides a number of important bug fixes and addresses an issue with verification of Apple devices," was all a release note stated.

It is available from Apple's Web site, and also via system update.

The last iteration, version 8.2 of iTunes, was released June 1. It provided support for the iPhone and iPod touch with the 3.0 OS software upgrade. It also included accessibility improvements and bug fixes.

Yea, I guess that's what Pre gets for advertising "$1200 cheaper than a iPhone 2 year contract with AT&T"

My friend has two iPhones, he pays $220 a month. Jesus!

I only pay $10-$20 a month for AT&T voice with their pay as you go.

Got $19 a month broadband.

If he pays 220 a month he is exaggerating or lying.
My bill is $172 and I have two iPhones' and one normal phone.
That includes unlimited texting, which is my biggest complaint. I have downloaded over 5 gigs of data on my phone, but im still charged 30 bucks for sending a few MGb of texts.

I'd say it's quite likely this will break Palm's syncing hack. Now iTunes probably uses more than just USB ID to identify the iPod/iPhone.

I wonder if purposely removing it is in Apples best interest. I think it may even be in Apples best interest to allow other devices to connect to iTunes. My reasoning is two fold.

The app is very common and its a key part in the success in the iDevice ecosystem. With so many people using iTunes to manage their music and with the iPod having a monopoly position its possible that some places like the EU may look to force Apple to not require iTunes support to use an iDevice. (Hell, theyve done crazier shit and they dont have the FairPlay ax to grind to anymore)

Second, If they allow other devices to use iTunes then Apple still has consumers using their app and their iTunes Store, yet they still cant get videos or apps, which may pull them back to an iDevice in the future. Plus, the iTunes library files and DB are transparent so Palm, albeit with a little effort and cost, could create an app or tie into a 3rd-party app that they can use, bypassing iTunes altogether. While buying a non-iDevice doesnt benefit Apple, bypassing both Apples HW and iTunes benefits them even less; not to mention that Apple has had plenty of time to put the kibosh on the Palm Pre access at this point and havent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacTripper

Yea, I guess that's what Pre gets for advertising "$1200 cheaper than a iPhone 2 year contract with AT&T".

But that is if you do a direct comparison of services. Since I dont support SMS and usually dont more than the minimum minutes per month the price for the Pre and the iPhone offer services at the same cost of $69/month for me. I also get the phone I want and rollover minutes, which is peace of mind I like (Im under the impression that Sprint doesnt offer that and I dont feel like looking it up).

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

I wonder if purposely removing it is in Apples best interest. I think it may even be in Apples best interest to allow other devices to connect to iTunes. My reasoning is two fold.

The app is very common and its a key part in the success in the iDevice ecosystem. With so many people using iTunes to manage their music and with the iPod having a monopoly position its possible that some places like the EU may look to force Apple to not require iTunes support to use an iDevice. (Hell, theyve done crazier shit and they dont have the FairPlay ax to grind to anymore)

Second, If they allow other devices to use iTunes then Apple still has consumers using their app and their iTunes Store, yet they still cant get videos or apps, which may pull them back to an iDevice in the future. Plus, the iTunes library files and DB are transparent so Palm, albeit with a little effort and cost, could create an app or tie into a 3rd-party app that they can use, bypassing iTunes altogether. While buying a non-iDevice doesnt benefit Apple, bypassing both Apples HW and iTunes benefits them even less; not to mention that Apple has had plenty of time to put the kibosh on the Palm Pre access at this point and havent. ...

I had the same thoughts.

I think what Palm did was a bit stupid and a bit underhanded, but I als think it would be in Apple's best interests to let them access iTunes.

Two pieces of the puzzle that are missing at this point are:

- We don't actually know if Apple has completely shut them out.
- We don't know why they did so if they did

For instance they may have shut them out from using a hack only in order to require them to do it "the right way" and be authorised users of the system. This would make sense to me because while you might want to open a restaurant and invite everyone in, you don't want people climbing in the windows at night and just helping themselves.

Secondly, people always forget that large companies like Apple have a whole series of agreements with their partners. It seems to me that this move could easily be engendered by some line in an agreement that says Apple is responsible for policing these kinds of issues. The analogy there is that if I allow a ticket reseller to resell my concert tickets to another company that also will resell them, I want something in writing that they are only going to resell said tickets to licensed resellers.

It's amusing to think that Steve Jobs personally got pissed at his old work-mate and deliberately shut out the Pre from spite, (and that may even be true), but there are a lot of rational explanations as well.

In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...

It's amusing to think that Steve Jobs personally got pissed at his old work-mate and deliberately shut out the Pre from spite, (and that may even be true), but there are a lot of rational explanations as well.

Clearly Apple is protecting it's assets with this move. With so many phones trying to be an iPhone and boast a lot of the same features, why wouldn't they? Competition in technology these days seems to consist of a "If you can't beat them, join them" stance instead of actual innovation. It's like American Idol (never seen it, never will) except it's technology.

I think what Palm did was a bit stupid and a bit underhanded, but I als think it would be in Apple's best interests to let them access iTunes.

Let's review something here:
- iTunes includes an unencrypted XML file listing the tracks in iTunes.
- The music is not encumbered by DRM (at least, the new stuff).
- Any desktop application has full access to that XML file, the file system, and the USB bus.

Add it all up, and there's one inescapable conclusion: Palm doesn't need iTunes to perform the sync of iTunes music to the Pre.

So Apple's denying them iTunes access. So what? They can write their own Pre music sync program. Just don't rely on Apple's code doing the work.

However, it does not take Steve Jobs' ego into consideration.
I'm sure Jobs is mad not only about Rubinstein leaving Apple, him steering Palm to go head-to-head against the iPod/iPhone universe, but even more so because of Rubinstein's chuzpah to just use iTunes.

In Jobs' universe this simply must stop!
No matter it makes sense or not.

Let's review something here:
- iTunes includes an unencrypted XML file listing the tracks in iTunes.
- The music is not encumbered by DRM (at least, the new stuff).
- Any desktop application has full access to that XML file, the file system, and the USB bus.

Add it all up, and there's one inescapable conclusion: Palm doesn't need iTunes to perform the sync of iTunes music to the Pre.

So Apple's denying them iTunes access. So what? They can write their own Pre music sync program. Just don't rely on Apple's code doing the work.

And THAT is probably exactly why Apple did what it did. No reason for them to get complaints about bad compatibility for PRE devices in iTunes.

I wonder if purposely removing it is in Apples best interest. I think it may even be in Apples best interest to allow other devices to connect to iTunes.

I initially thought the same thing. Putting conspiracy theorists aside for a moment, I (want to) think that Apple may be doing this simply because it wants to do what Apple does best - a seamless integration between hardware and software.

Everyone knows how bad Palm's old Hotsync API was. It was horrible (on the windows platform) and was always a hit-and-miss with connections and interfered with functionality at times with other apps.

The problem that would arise the same way that Windows currently is. Finger-pointing with who is conflicting with what. If Pre causes instability with iTunes, who's fault is it? I could see a regular-Joe that buys a Pre (with badly written syncing technology), plugs it in and causes a problem. The user at first may likely blame Apple/iTunes as the problem. Apple does not want that.

So I will take it with a grain of salt. Palm was really stupid for brazenly advertising the iTunes functionality. Now if Palm has some master grand plan, I'd be more than interested in hearing it.

So while Apple may get some users irritated by its action, I can see why they would want to do it. That doesn't mean they are right, but they do have the right to control what uses their software. They are the one after all that is maintaining it and Palm is just trying to hitch a free ride.

Let's review something here:
- iTunes includes an unencrypted XML file listing the tracks in iTunes.
- The music is not encumbered by DRM (at least, the new stuff).
- Any desktop application has full access to that XML file, the file system, and the USB bus.

Add it all up, and there's one inescapable conclusion: Palm doesn't need iTunes to perform the sync of iTunes music to the Pre.

So Apple's denying them iTunes access. So what? They can write their own Pre music sync program. Just don't rely on Apple's code doing the work.

Absolutely correct and that is what they should have done in the first place. Advertising a feature that relies on a competitor's IP without even talking to them was a sick idea. Let's wait for the first class action cases suing Palm for not delivering an advertised feature...

The problem is just... Palm has never been good at writing Mac software. Palm Desktop anyone?

I can picture apple saying that it didn't mean to disable the pre sync...then fix it. It sends the message that "hey if you buy a pre, you never know what will happen" while at the same time, apple will look like heroes because they fixed it in a subsequent release.

Clearly Apple is protecting it's assets with this move. With so many phones trying to be an iPhone and boast a lot of the same features, why wouldn't they? Competition in technology these days seems to consist of a "If you can't beat them, join them" stance instead of actual innovation. .

absolutely. Apple created a wildly popular program, iTunes, to go along with their wildly popular devices, iPods and iPhones. Why on EARTH shoudl apple allow other companies to encroach on their territory? All these iphone-killers are trying their hardest to copy Apple, and Apple is supposed to just sit back and let them copy one of the biggest assets they have (the iTunes ecosystem)?? Get real. Palm was outrageously audacious in publicy promoting iTunes integration.

Assuming the Pre shows up like a USB MSD, you can just copy files over. You could probably even cleverly, if archiacly, design an AppleScript to copy certain files over. It's not breaking, more like Apple... spanking Palm.

Let's review something here:
- iTunes includes an unencrypted XML file listing the tracks in iTunes.
- The music is not encumbered by DRM (at least, the new stuff).
- Any desktop application has full access to that XML file, the file system, and the USB bus.

Add it all up, and there's one inescapable conclusion: Palm doesn't need iTunes to perform the sync of iTunes music to the Pre.

So Apple's denying them iTunes access. So what? They can write their own Pre music sync program. Just don't rely on Apple's code doing the work.

Ah, yes you are right that I totally forgot about that aspect. I think we are essentially arguing form very similar points of view anyway though.

I was just trying to respond to the general tone of this and other forums where everyone is freaking out about Apple "blocking" people and how it's an outrage etc. As you point out, there is no block at all.

In most of the other forums I've seen today, every second commenter is calling Apple a "Nazi" or putting the whole issue down to Steve Jobs personal enmity. I just wanted to offer a more rational approach.

In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...

I fixed your post for you. I'm amazed Palm even brought a device out at all (I and the electronics stores near me were all under the impression they'd gone under until Pre was announced). The only Palm I ever used was...something I can't remember, and it had an awful interface.

I wonder if purposely removing it is in Apples best interest. I think it may even be in Apples best interest to allow other devices to connect to iTunes. My reasoning is two fold.

The app is very common and its a key part in the success in the iDevice ecosystem. With so many people using iTunes to manage their music and with the iPod having a monopoly position its possible that some places like the EU may look to force Apple to not require iTunes support to use an iDevice. (Hell, theyve done crazier shit and they dont have the FairPlay ax to grind to anymore)

Second, If they allow other devices to use iTunes then Apple still has consumers using their app and their iTunes Store, yet they still cant get videos or apps, which may pull them back to an iDevice in the future. Plus, the iTunes library files and DB are transparent so Palm, albeit with a little effort and cost, could create an app or tie into a 3rd-party app that they can use, bypassing iTunes altogether. While buying a non-iDevice doesnt benefit Apple, bypassing both Apples HW and iTunes benefits them even less; not to mention that Apple has had plenty of time to put the kibosh on the Palm Pre access at this point and havent.

But that is if you do a direct comparison of services. Since I dont support SMS and usually dont more than the minimum minutes per month the price for the Pre and the iPhone offer services at the same cost of $69/month for me. I also get the phone I want and rollover minutes, which is peace of mind I like (Im under the impression that Sprint doesnt offer that and I dont feel like looking it up).

You gotta love it!

You do have a point about the EU. But why bother to do something preemptively (the EU may come up with something else). Also, one can fully understand Apple's (SJ's?) reaction to Palm trying to stick it to the iPhone, while simultaneously (and hypocritically) relying on Apple for part of Pre's functionality.

Incidentally, if Palm was able to connect up with iTunes before, they'll probably figure out a way to do so with 8.2.1.

Tim Cook is gay, believes in climate change, and cares deeply about racial equality. Deal with it (and please spare us if you can't).

I smell an anti-trust lawsuit in the making. This is the beginning of the anti-competitive legal battles for Apple. Intentionally inhibiting a consumer's use of non-Apple products. Here comes the legal pain. They deserve the lawsuit.

Assuming the Pre shows up like a USB MSD, you can just copy files over. You could probably even cleverly, if archiacly, design an AppleScript to copy certain files over. It's not breaking, more like Apple... spanking Palm.

But how many people will want to do that? It's all about the ease of use.

With some other phones, you have to go through a few steps to buy music or programs. Reviewers are taking them to task over that, pointing out just how easy it is on iTunes.

This could be a problem for Palm if they're counting on easy iTunes syncing for some of their sales.

As has been already said here, let Palm write their own app. If there are problems, then their customers will properly have to go complain to Palm, not Apple.

I fixed your post for you. I'm amazed Palm even brought a device out at all (I and the electronics stores near me were all under the impression they'd gone under until Pre was announced). The only Palm I ever used was...something I can't remember, and it had an awful interface.

I smell an anti-trust lawsuit in the making. This is the beginning of the anti-competitive legal battles for Apple. Intentionally inhibiting a consumer's use of non-Apple products. Here comes the legal pain. They deserve the lawsuit.

I doubt someone could win that. Apple is just supplying a service to its customers. That's fine.

People are always crying foul because Apple provides seamless end to end solutions for their customers that are just really popular. They don't make much money, if any, on iTunes and App Store. It is simply an additional service offered to their customers that makes owning an Apple device that much more pleasurable to use.

If there are people who think there are anti trust issues here, they are just jealous, want something for nothing, hate Apple, maybe or all three. Imagine I bought 4 tires from my car dealer and part of the purchase includes free tire rotation. You, however, bought your tires at some cheap place. If you then went to my dealer and asked to have your tires rotated (free) they might say, sorry, we only rotate tires for our customers. What are you going to do, sue them? Give me a break.